Defence mitigating circumstances

Lamilad

Eagerly awaiting the outcome of this....

Staceyplindfield

Ok here's a summary,.....
Having never used this forum before and not technical at all, I found the newbies forum quite daunting, however through guidance from the forum managed to win the case, so many thanks to everyone for your help, it was much appreciated and would if been a different outcome with out your guidance, a heart felt thankyou.

So court scheduled for 12, had legs like jelly and just scraped my car on a wall trying to park (within a car park!) so not the best start, I arrived in court 20 minutes early, the court usher asked if it was 'parking fine', I replied yes, he said you have the best judge, so was hoping he was right!
Shortly afterwards the barrister arrived and the usher informed her I was the defendant, she introduced herself and advised that she was not from the company and would not be able to be cross examined etc....the usher called us in...
The Judge started straight away by saying she has received my skeleton argument and fired me the question why did I not feel the contract was valid, I replied it was incomplete as only one page and that it was dated 2014, she said it clearly states that they have permission to enforcement on the land and felt the contract was fine, she then scribbled a note and said another point was particulars of claim show incorrect date, the claimant has expressed this was entered in error which I accept, I then advised it was not only on the particulars but also on exhibit number, in which judge said exhibit, what exhibit, I replied in my defence bundle, she said she had not received this and angrily slammed her glasses on the desk, I informed her one copy had been sent registered and one hand delivered, she asked us to step outside and then could resume when documents found.

Sat waiting, hadn't been going in my favour so far so confidence was low, 15 minutes later we were called in and she went straight into signage and asked the claimant about the vcs v HM quote, unfortunately my mind went blank and my only response to this was 'this is different due to vat claim'.

The judge swiftly moved on and asked me about the Beavis sign, I defended this quite well, but the claimant diagreed the signs in my case were visable and as said I had previously been to the hospital on four occasions in the letter I wrote to Gladstones that I was avoiding car park charges, I interrupted that the hospital was a different hospital and judge advised claimant to continue and I could respond afterwards....oops. Judge asked me why did I not park in car park, advised the route takes you onto a one way system short cut to the hospital in which I saw the space and parked, distressed daughter etc,... Judge then asked why did I not see signs, again distressed daughter, we then went through the signage plans and had to explain layout (signs on post/brick wall) offered my video evidence in which she said no need, vine was then quoted by claimant and she wanted full transcript of which I had to hand (brownie point for me) she read through this all and then said to claimant, the paragraph quote in your witness statement is a response to the vine case and not from judge in that case, I then added my points to the case (vine was in distress, did not see signs etc). Ipc was mentioned and we both contributed, claimant also mentioned audit, in which I mentioned tax disc so out of date sign, also stated claimants photo out of date and not in location of parking, judge pointed out that "no ball games sign next to parking sign, believing it looked residential area)

The judge asked if we had anything to add, we both said no, the judge recorded ...
The defendants bundle was prepared and very well presented and was clear etc, then went through contract (in agreement with claimant) , signs, and again read the vine transcript, and concluded that she believed the defendant didn't see the signs and that the photos of her daughters ear proved she would have been in distress and the entrance sign was placed high on post and positioning of signs were not adequate, and believes defendant couldn't of seen sign, secondly it looks like residential therefore ruling in favour of defendant!

Was awarded parking costs for that day and loss of earnings, she believed they had played reasonably and not a robo claimer as they have lots of cases and signs are usually well written within car parks.

The judge also said to the barrister she advises her to inform that the vine quote is incorrect on what they are sending out.

When leaving the barrister said, I bet your happy with that, I replied I am indeed, she then asked me if I was a law student and is this what I do, I replied no but thankyou, she continued to say what a great bundle was prepared, we wished each other a good weekend and departed the court.

Was not expecting the hearing to go quite as it did....I didn't expect it to last over an hour, also assumed claimant speak, defendant respond, questions then judgement, however was interrogation more than me 'telling my story' in order.


Happy for the win.....thankyou everyone.

System

Good win but it shouldn't have got to court. Interested in the comment

The judge also said to the barrister she advises her to inform that the vine quote is incorrect on what they are sending out.

As was said earlier.

What you have to understand with this lot is that they misquote, mislead and when you get their pack there will be lies in it too.

Staceyplindfield

Yes couldn't believe advice was being given to the barrister on that point! Although if it's a standard witness statement that gets sent out can be used to defend other cases that 'it was the repondant saying that quote and not the judge'.

Lamilad

Great stuff, very well done.

Umkomaas

Great win. :T

Despite the judge warning on the future inclusion of Vine, it will, no doubt, be wantonly ignored by both UKCPM and Gladstones.

Coupon-mad

Very well done! Fantastic job and you clearly overcame your nerves!

Another great win chalked up v UK Car Park Management and Gladstones, cost them a fair whack too!